View Single Post
  #32   ^
Old Wed, Mar-01-06, 00:24
Frederick's Avatar
Frederick Frederick is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,512
 
Plan: Atkins - Maintenance
Stats: 185/150/150 Male 5' 10"
BF:
Progress: 100%
Location: Northern California
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsTheWooo
Unfortunately most people are more like me and not like the thin girl - if we eat whatever we want with abandon we pile on fat like nobody's business and rapidly disintegrate in health.


I think this would be true of anyone. If you create an environment where any person remains sedentary while eating excessive calories, he or she will gain weight. If I were to remain motionless while eating 10,000 calories worth of steak daily, I’ll set the world’s record for fastest to 500lbs!

Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsTheWooo
For it to be so *common* today means things are triggering it. It can't just be food availability. For example, you say the rich had obesity - but did the rich look like america? No, most were relatively thin and healthy, although, of course there were a few who were obese because obesity can only exist when food is plentiful (and those were probably just supersensitive to obesity, and, would be even fatter today). Food has not been *scarce* for a period of time well before the obesity epidemic.


I’d imagine that in whatever time period we isolate, there can be found “triggers” in every respective society which mirrors our own when it comes to precipitating a certain action or inaction. Of course, I haven’t the foggiest as to the varying degrees on the severity of triggering or tipping point events over a wide period of time. However, I must agree that historically, the affluent were more slender than they were corpulent. The only difference is the impoverished were “never” corpulent. This is the main difference, in my view. The wealthy of the past never had access to fast food, ready made ice cream, or candy bars for a buck on every other street corner. The stark contrast is that these days, anyone has ready access to such an abundance of every kind of food imaginable. I’d imagine that 100 years ago, even for the wealthy, it would require a very concerted effort to get fat, which is completely unlike today where becoming fat is effortless.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsTheWooo
This is a casual observation of course, I've no facts to support it... but it just seems to me when we REALLY started getting fat is when life started getting less natural and by extension more stressful.


I’m curious, why do you feel this is true?

In my view, I don’t believe our lives are any more or less stressful than any other period in history. If anything, I’d imagine being a nobleman during the turbulent French revolution, or being on the wrong side during the many great wars, or those persecuted during the Spanish inquisition to be far more stressful than being an everyday American feeling entitled to live a life completely absolved of any responsibility for his or her actions, or non actions. Yet, we are the generation afflicted with the obesity epidemic, while we never hear of stories of fat Neanderthals running away from those giant elephants and overgrown tigers with big teeth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsTheWooo
Either way, that successful, very busy people often avoid obesity doesn't invalidate the idea that our stressful lifestyle is contributing to obesity collectively. Most of middle class and lower class people who are struggling to pay for the things they own and want and just working themselves to death are obese.


I’m not sure I fully appreciate the relationship between feeling the angst of stress and eating too much. I infer that you believe there exists a positive correlation between stress and overeating?

Since this is the war zone, I’ll throw up this politically incorrect hypothesis that will be sure to incite some ire. A common trait of many (certainly not all) self-made “successful” people is discipline. I’ve rarely ever met a highly disciplined person not realize his or her goals. Perhaps, it is because most successful people are perfectionists, they also make every effort and already have the discipline to conform to whatever society defines as physically ideal as well, whereas those who are impoverished (lacking discipline or drive compared to the self-made person) lack not only the discipline to improve their situation (assuming they wish to improve it), but also lacking discipline in other areas of their lives as well, such as refraining from eating too much.

Is it possible that those traits (ambition, drive, and discipline), which characterize the self-made successful person is what keeps one from over-indulging?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsTheWooo
Fredrick I have to disagree with you on a point here.
I disagree that over eating causes obesity. I think metabolic disease causes obesity, and over eating is but one of many catalysts for metabolic disease in susceptible people.


If the stats compiled are correct, in America obesity now comprises of roughly 60% of the population. So, I infer that you’re asserting 60% of Americans are afflicted with one form or another of metabolic disease?

Firstly, I find that kind of…er…high. LOL

Secondly, even if true, if these 60% of American’s will power utterly incapacitated by a metabolic disease (I’m sure some are, but certainly not 60%), would they still be obese if there weren’t such a widespread availability of abundant food?

Finally, would these 60% be obese 300 years ago?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsTheWooo
However, I don't think becoming obese is necessarily indicative of failings. I think suppressing obesity is indicative of exceptionally (in ability to tolerate stress, work ethic, dedication, whatever). It doesn't work in reverse, since, it is common today to become obese due to such a high preponderance of catalysts that could cause obesity (extreme stress and food). As anyone can see, obesity is natural and common. Thinness is either unnatural or uncommon depending on who we are talking about.


I could not agree with you more that obesity is not and should not ever be considered a human failing. I would hope that we’ve evolved enough in our civilization that it is perfectly acceptable to be whomever or whatever one wishes to be. Clearly, obesity has been marked as common in our generation; however, that certainly isn’t the case historically. For 99.9% of our evolution, being slender was our most natural state.

What has changed from now and the past when obesity weren’t as widespread as it is now? Could modern stress, work ethic, and dedication being the culprit for obesity? Every era had more than it’s share of the latter. Again, the main difference is that modernity has made food abundant, and physical activity unnecessary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsTheWooo
Thing is Frederick, I didn't do those things and neither did you, but a few exceptional humans did. Most people at the time were average and doing average things, just like today.


Woo, that is very true.

Great things are accomplished by ordinary people aspiring to extraordinary feats. In my view, it is our birthright and within each of us to strive to accomplish similar feats when the drive, determination, and necessity all conspire us to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsTheWooo
What's causing the disease? Why is there a need to suppress weight to begin with?


I'm not sure what is causing it, but I suspect it's having both elements of widely available food and overeating?

The need to surpress weight is driven by most people's view that slender is more aesthetically pleasing in appearance to being not slender. Of course, there are exceptions, but in general, slender is attractive, while fat isn't. Why? I don't know. The media? Genetics? Enviroment? I have no idea. All I know is that in the era and society in which I live, being slender and fit is seen as attractive while being fat and out of shape isn't.

What does that mean? It means that many of us will feel a need to surpress weight.
Reply With Quote